When you fire an arrow at an owlbear, and the attack roll is successful so we know for a fact that your attack actually hit the owlbear and caused damage, I like to describe the owlbear as having an arrow sticking out of it. I can't imagine that this position is controversial at all.Two questions:
Was this ever in doubt. And why the sad face?
(To me, anything else would be completely bewildering. Monsters aren't just there to be killed. If you can heal up by resting, so should the goblins and owlbears.)
When you fire an arrow at an owlbear, and the attack roll is successful so we know for a fact that your attack actually hit the owlbear and caused damage, I like to describe the owlbear as having an arrow sticking out of it. I can't imagine that this position is controversial at all.
The difference between an owlbear and a barn owl is not the difference between an epic hero and some peasant. Regardless of how HP work for PCs and NPCs, animals have HP which represent their bulk, because you need to inflict significant amounts of physical trauma before they stop moving.
I have zero objections to any of that.When you fire an arrow at an owlbear, and the attack roll is successful so we know for a fact that your attack actually hit the owlbear and caused damage, I like to describe the owlbear as having an arrow sticking out of it. I can't imagine that this position is controversial at all.
The difference between an owlbear and a barn owl is not the difference between an epic hero and some peasant. Regardless of how HP work for PCs and NPCs, animals have HP which represent their bulk, because you need to inflict significant amounts of physical trauma before they stop moving.
Which is actually still reasonable... ish... if you use the optional rule that requires a medkit in order to spend hit dice.Emphasis mine. We do not know that for a fact. What we do know for a fact is: The hit points of animals, monsters, and PCs work the same.
Would you seriously try and argue that a whale (or kraken, if you prefer) could be "missed" by a hundred arrows, and then succumb to one that hits it in a vital spot?I am familiar with your preference (and honestly mine too - that is why i house rule), but an arrow that "hits" an owl bear need not be sticking into it or even physically damage it (to an extent that it hinders the beast) to cause hit point damage. Just like PCs. In fact it is pretty clear these are not meat points as different animals of the same size can have vastly different hit points.
Obviously I was talking about the individual Sage Advice items that are impacted by any given errata.99% of the sage advice will still be applicable, mostly in things that aren't touched.
Obviously I was talking about the individual Sage Advice items that are impacted by any given errata.
Which is actually still reasonable... ish... if you use the optional rule that requires a medkit in order to spend hit dice.
Would you seriously try and argue that a whale (or kraken, if you prefer) could be "missed" by a hundred arrows, and then succumb to one that hits it in a vital spot?
I would consider such an explanation to be absurd. A vast beast does not fall from the first weapon that impact it; there's a lot of meat to dig through, before you can impair it enough to stop moving. If the rules are seriously trying to convey such a narrative, then the rules are also absurd, and deserve to be criticized to the full extent possible.
If any of those arrows had penetrated, then the specific damage from that arrow would not be susceptible to healing via nap mechanics. Since the creature can take a nap and remove all of the damage, it necessarily means that none of the damage was substantially physical in any way.No, I would not, nor do I think you need to. The HP rules are intentionally amorphous. Any individual arrow need not be stuck in its side, but clearly some must have. It is not an all or nothing proposition.
Isn't the obvious solution to deprecate Sage Advice given before a particular set of errata?
If any of those arrows had penetrated, then the specific damage from that arrow would not be susceptible to healing via nap mechanics. Since the creature can take a nap and remove all of the damage, it necessarily means that none of the damage was substantially physical in any way.
Amorphous Hit Points worked significantly better under any ruleset that Gygax would have used, since naps didn't heal anything at all unless you were dealing with a supernatural creature or a superhuman Constitution score, and thus there was room to describe some of those hits as partially physical. Under slow healing, damage can by any combination of meat and fatigue. Under fast healing, damage cannot be meat.